I certainly respect our Queen, who is a decent enough old dear, but I couldn't care less about the other royals, who have too many dollars and not enough sense. The money that it takes to keep the royals in caviar, Porsches, and Jaeger clothing would have been much better spent on the British people.

The best part about President and Mrs. Obama not being invited to the wedding is that they don't have to shell out for a gift.

I certainly respect our Queen, who is a decent enough old dear, but I couldn't care less about the other royals, who have too many dollars and not enough sense. The money that it takes to keep the royals in caviar, Porsches, and Jaeger clothing would have been much better spent on the British people.

The best part about President and Mrs. Obama not being invited to the wedding is that they don't have to shell out for a gift.

I have a soft spot for Elizabeth and I had one for her parents who helped lead Britain through WWII.

You and I have mentioned before that we had read THE LITTLE PRINCESSES all those many years ago.

CL--having lived in England for a while I can say from observation that there is a segment of English society that is very interested in--and invested in--the doings of "the royals."

I don't want to sound classist--but it is not the educated middle class that evinces this high level of emotional investment....

I must concur from several years of having worked in large chain bookstores. Almost the only people I saw buying magazines and fan-type books on the royals were women, some of whom would chat up the booksellers about favorite soap operas as well when they could buttonhole any who couldn't muster up something compelling they had to do just then.

The notable exception was one man who bought several magazines of this sort. I recall remarking something like, "If you'll forgive my commenting upon your purchase, sir, I don't think I've ever before sold these magazines to a man."

His reply was along the lines of, "Believe me, you're not. I wouldn't touch the things. My wife insisted I pick up them up for her."

He looked pretty disgusted. I didn't bother asking if he wanted a bag or not; that he did was self-evident.

I like the Queen too, I am glad she is not my mother but I think she is a good queen. I find her to be hard-working and dedicated.

I really don't have an oppinion on the other royals who I think are just people trying to make sense of being born into a antiquated system where the expectations put on them don't always make sense. I don't see them as dedicated as the Queen but she was born at a different time.

The money that it takes to keep the royals in caviar, Porsches, and Jaeger clothing would have been much better spent on the British people.

Perhaps but the money it takes isn't actually coming out of our pockets. The current arrangment is that the Royal household receives X million a year from the Civil List but, for about twenty years now, they've just given it straight back (yes, we could just not bother paying it, this way was designed to get around the labyrinthe of Royal protocol; in the same way as the Queen is exempt from income tax but makes a voluntary contribution of the same amount). The family is extraordinarily wealthy because they own half the country (literally, the Royal household is official landowner of most of Wessex and much of Anglia). We pay for the upkeep of the palaces but, as national treasures, we'd be paying for them anyway. We also pay the expenses on any official engagement the Queen has as head of state.

Finally, it's been worked out many times that the Royal household costs us less than they bring in through tourist revenue.

He who oppresses the poor shows contempt for their Maker, but whoever is kind to the needy honors God. ~ Proverbs 14:31

The presumption that "the people" have any real stake in, or care, about who a wealthy playbor--regardless of title--is banging, legitimately or ill...,is actually pretty silly in this day and age.

Might sound odd but I actually agree with this. Don't misunderstand, I'm still a monarchist, I still think that the role of monarch is an integral part of our traditions and legal system but so long as they're not scandalising teh country by rogering goats or something, I don't much care who holds the position. The institution is the important part, who currently occupies it is a secondary concern.

He who oppresses the poor shows contempt for their Maker, but whoever is kind to the needy honors God. ~ Proverbs 14:31

The above linked piece says it is not a snub, but I think it is, and an egregious snub at that.

Our New Zealand Prime Minister, John Key, has been invited, but, then, he's a Tory, so maybe that makes all the difference.

As anyone who has been married will tell you the descisions about who to invite and not invite can be a nightmare. It is considerably more the case here. I am sure President and Mrs Obama were not offended and with all that is going on in the world at present I am sure the President does not have time to attend a wedding in England. William is second in line to the throne and as such this wedding is not a full state occasion as his parents was. Priority is given to royalty and to the leaders of commonwealth countries. Australia's Prime Minister is also invited and she is Labor so politics has nothing to do with it. It was also the wish of William and Kate that some ordinary people be invited such as the heads of charities. With a reported 1900 guests they should fill the Abbey nicely and I wish them well in their plans and their life together.